Talk:ER (TV series)/Archive 3

Titles

My vote is for no titles. The fact that the Wikilinks are set based on the characters' names without titles seems stylistic evidence that the titles do not belong in the entry. Historically the fact that the titles changed--not frequently, but regularly--as nurses enter medical school (but more commonly as medical students graduate) makes the titles confusing. For instance, the title for character John Carter is "Dr." even in the paragraph on the original cast, but he wasn't a doctor at the time, only a medical student. Better to have titles and ranks discussed as part of each character's evolution. What's more, entries on real doctors (such as Jonas Salk, Henry Kissinger, and Neil deGrasse Tyson) do not use titles; why should an entry on a team of fictional doctors and nurses? Dave Golland (talk) 18:03, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

The titles do change which is why they shouldn't be there, Drmargi. And the reason they aren't in the introduction of real-world physicians are because it is against MOS, fictional and nonfictional. Therequiembellishere (talk) 18:08, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I Agree - NO titles, like it was already mentioned, the titles switch regularly throughout the character's term on the show. Abby Lockhart was a med. student, then a nurse, back to a med student, intern and finally a doctor. The titles should be left off and only showing the character's name. --DJS24 18:12, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Tounge-in-cheek correction: note that I said "doctors," not "physicians." Next month I expect to become a doctor--just not that kind of doctor. ;-) Dave Golland (talk) 20:32, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations, Dave; I'm already "that kind of doctor" and get what you mean, and how hard you worked. Well done.

That said, I find the "titles change" argument wholly unconvincing weighed against the information about the characters the titles provide. I can think of three title changes over the life of the show (not all the changes Abby made were reflected in her title, just one.) If anyone can detail more than three, go to it, but across fourteen seasons and over 300 episodes, that's not remotely "all the time." Drmargi (talk) 21:03, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Drmargi!

What do you think of the MOS argument shared by me and Therequiembellishere? Dave Golland (talk) 21:40, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, Dave, are you a what degree do you hold? (The ones I think would tie with an MD most are a DO, PhD, PsyD or possibly a JD). Therequiembellishere (talk) 21:46, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Next month I will defend my PhD dissertation. That's kind of like when Pratt and Morris took the boards last year, except I can barely work a band-aid (I'm still in awe whenever I visit the "real" doctor--or watch ER). I don't know what a DO or PsyD are. Doctor of Optometry? Psychology Doctor? Most psychologists I know get MDs or PhDs. Perhaps these are degrees offered outside of the United States? Dave Golland (talk) 01:48, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I see. My friend did her dissertation and she wouldn't let us use her computer under any circumstances. A DO is a Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine (I believe MDs are allopathic, but the degree doesn't reflect that) and PsyDs are Doctors of Psychology. They're both offered in the US, ostheopaths are actually quite common and have theire own organisation. PsyDs aren't very common but I have met two. Psychologists with MDs? Are you sure they weren't psychiatrists? (Btw, you are on an encylopedia. :-D) Therequiembellishere (talk) 02:04, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

JD is law like MD is medicine; they're technically terminal degrees but not academic doctorates, so technically it's they who are not "real" doctors. DO is osteopathy, and DPsy is Psychology, generally used in Britain similarly to DPhil for Philosophy. We still use the Latinate forms of the degree titles, but some British universities Anglicize them. Psychologists are PhD's but psychitrists are both MD's and PhD's. I'm signing off on a student's dissertation tomorrow, and get to do the traditional congratulations. That's a pretty fine moment at the end of your defense. What's your discipline? Drmargi (talk) 02:09, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

History. I've noticed that the NY Times uses the "dr." title only for physicians (and people like Kissinger who insist on it!). Dave Golland (talk) 02:16, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Drmargi, in some places, you have to be a JD and and an MD to be a coroner. I hadn't realised that. I never met any doctors when I was in London. They have to be both? Wow. I'm not (I'm in secondary school) but my entire family on both sides are physicians (mum's a psychiatrist, go figure) and I've been around their friends all my life. If my family member isn't a physician, there's a good chance they're a nurse. I'm heavily considering getting am MD; not sure if it's my passion yet. Dave, I have too! It's very rude IMO but I've seen educational doctors frequently get their titles used (EdDs and PhDs) and, of course, other medical doctorates such as dentists, vets, podiatrists, optometrists, psychologist or chiropractors (ew). However, Doctors of Nursing are tossed aside! Rice doesn't force it, but they call her "Dr Rice" a lot and hers is a PhD in Poli Sci! Therequiembellishere (talk) 02:24, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not aware of that requirement, at least in the US, but individual states vary, so I can only speak to my own. Many medical schools have the option to specialize in forensic medicine, however. (BTW, we're gently hinting that it's not appropriate to refer to Condoleeza Rice as "Condi", particularly with her nickname misspelled.) Drmargi (talk) 08:59, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I think Kansas does. But I only called her that after Dave's comment. Before it was just Dr Rice. Therequiembellishere (talk) 09:08, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Maybe The Times has a special category for PhDs who are or were Secretaries of State. I presume you're referring to Condoleeza Rice. And speaking of Latin (thanks Drmargi), is the middle part of your user name "Embellish" or "belli?"Dave Golland (talk) 02:35, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

As the publication of record, The Times tends to change v e r y s l o w l y. Case in point is how long it took for them to start using the title "Ms." Dave Golland (talk) 02:37, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I believe the BBC has occasionally called Condi "Dr Rice". Therequiembellishere (talk) 02:39, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

---

Coming back to the topic, there is only one users supporting the titles while the others are against it. Why are they remaining? Therequiembellishere (talk) 18:39, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

We should give it a bit more time. Dave Golland (talk) 18:44, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Consensus is agreement, not a vote. You have to give it time, and you may never get it. You also should also consider that this has come up before, and consensus has always been to leave the titles in the cast table and its introduction in part for one very good reason: that's how NBC, NBC Universal Media (NBC's press arm), and Warner Brothers consistently identify the characters. The titles are part of who the characters are, and it's important information to include in the table. The occasional changes can be handled with footnotes. I've noticed this kind of edit is one you like to make but it's not always appropriate (case in point, your attempt to remove US Presidents' numbers.) The MOS is a set of guidelines, not a rulebook to be followed rigidly, and not definitive on this point based on my reading. Drmargi (talk) 19:06, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't go so far as to require unanimity to declare consensus. I just think that too little time has passed to do so. The more time that passes, the greater the chance that your arguments will convince me (or even Therequiembellishere) or ours will convince you. Opinions can be softened or reveresed, and consensus might be reached. But in long run, if you remain alone in your opinion, I think the change could be legitimately made because of the rule about entry ownership.

Can you give us Wikilinks to the location of the archived previous discussions of this topic? Also, since your point about NBC Universal conflicts with Therequiembellishere's point about MOS, could you show us other TV series Wikipedia entries which follow the conventions of their producers? You can change my mind if you can successfully do that. Dave Golland (talk) 15:15, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Language Changes in the Later Years of "ER"

In recent years, the language on "ER" has been changed to reflect Gen X lingo. Here are the main changes:

Words such as "angry" and "frustrated" are never used; instead, the word "pissed" is used over and over and over.

A word such as "posterior" or "butt" is never used; instead, the word "ass" is used over and over in some attempt to sound faux-gritty.

The words "look at" are never used; instead, the Gen X words "check it out" are used.

The word "guys" is used in every other sentence.

Here is how the new, dumbed-down scripts sound: "Hey, guys. You guys shouldn't be pissed at the new guys on ER, guys. You guys should get your asses to check out, like, you know, like the guys on the new version of the show, guys. I'm pissed at you guys who don't get your asses to check out the guys who have written the new Gen X script, guys. Bye, guys." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.44.153.18 (talk) 19:26, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

• Look, you may not like the speech patterns in this show, but it's no need to go off on a tirade about it. This simply reflects the speech pattern that most Americans use today. SVelasquez07 (talk) 00:50, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Final season

Did I hear the advert right? Therequiembellishere (talk) 01:10, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes. The original plan was to end last year, but NBC gave them another year because of the strike. Drmargi (talk) 19:07, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

I know I'm not an editor...

...but I have an addition you might want to consider for the article in the guest appearances section: in 2004, Anupam Kher appeared as Ajay Rasgotra, Neela's father. The significance (or trivia?) is that Kher also played Parminder Nagra's father in Bend It Like Beckham. Kher does have a Wiki page.

just a suggestion. :)

BlueSky90 (talk) 18:52, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Removal of Maura Tierney from the main credits

Did anyone notice that Maura Tierney was not listed in the credits for season 15 episode 2? Could someone please edit the list of regular cast members to reflect this? Also, why is Goran Visnjic still listed as a regular? Is there any indication that he will return as anything other than a guest star? DuncanRoberts (talk) 20:20, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Goran and Maura are still on the show, but not appearing weekly. They depart next week, after which time, they can be removed. They are only credited in the episodes in which they appear; this was true for Goran all last season - he was still main cast, not a guest star then. This all has to do with the union and how contracts and credits work, but until after the next episode, the credits are accurate. Drmargi (talk) 22:01, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

I understand your point, but in the table listing the episode appearances of regular cast members, Visnjic is only listed for the episodes he is credited for during season 14. Tierney is listed with an open-ending duration of episodes, where it should read that she appears in episodes 125–310. Episode 312 should be added after the episode airs, omitting episode 311. I know it's picky, but I feel a need for consistency. DuncanRoberts (talk) 23:38, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

I made the change, since it does need to be done, but rather than leave a post here with the expectation someone else will make a change, the usual practice is to make it yourself. That's why you're an editor, I assume. Drmargi (talk) 11:01, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Regrettably, I am not an editor of this page, but am keen to keep it updated. Thanks for making the edit. DuncanRoberts (talk) 13:21, 12 October 2008 (UTC0

If you can comment here, you can edit the page. Drmargi (talk) 15:13, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Visnjic's credits for S14 and S15

An editor moved Goran Visnjic's episodes for Seasons 14 and 15 from main cast to guest cast, which I have reverted. Visnjic was credited first among the main cast in the episodes where he appeared. Guest cast is not credited that way (compare Noah Wyle being credited as a Special Guest Star in Season 12.) Visnjic's participation in S14/15 was limited, and there is no previous cast member credited as he was in recent years, but the credits are what establishes how he should be listed in this article. Moving his credits for 14 and 15 to guest/supporting is an editor's interpretation of his role, and as such, POV. Likewise, Tierney was off-contract and only credited for the episodes in which she appeared in S15, yet the same editor, again acting on POV, listed her as continuous main cast from 310-312, also inacurate as well as inconsistent with how he/she had just changed Visnjic's credits. As a result, both edits have been reverted. Drmargi (talk) 22:53, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

I would need to agree w/ the reverts. If the Goran's name appeared first in the credits in Season 14, than he should be credited for those episodes. Now, I haven't watched any of season 15, and as far as I'm concerned, he only appeared in the one episode. If his name appeared first in the credits, than that should be credited as a main star episode. Now, from this point on, I would need to say that Visnjic and Tierney are no longer part of the cast. So their names need to be removed from the infobox and the main cast chart. Thanks --DJS24 18:58, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Visnjic was credited first in Ep. 312, his last. As for the infobox, we need to be consistent. If we label the cast list as "Season 15 cast" then Visnjic, Tierney and Phifer have to be there since they were S15 cast. If we list it as "Current cast" as it is now (or was last I looked) then take them out. Either way works for me, and the latter is consistent with the cast table. Drmargi (talk) 19:07, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

title of song end of season 6

Do you know where I can obtain title of song used in final episode of season 6, when Nurse Hathaway drives to Seattle to meet(surprise) George Clooney? thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.252.159.185 (talk) 07:12, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Longest-running medical drama?

In the first paragraph, it is written:

ER is NBC's second longest-running drama (after Law & Order), and, at 15 seasons, the longest-running American primetime medical drama of all time.

In General Hospital, it says:

General Hospital (commonly abbreviated GH) is an American soap opera broadcast on the ABC television network during the day and on SOAPnet each weeknight. It is the longest-running serial produced in Hollywood,...

From the alleged source, http://www.erheadquarters.com/news/11/after11years_033105.htm , I can only find:

ER, which has been renewed through 2007-08, is no longer the ratings juggernaut of Wyle's earlier years, but it remains NBC's most-watched scripted series and performs strongly with advertiser-coveted young adults. CBS' Without a Trace now beats ER in viewers (18.9 million viewers to 16.1 million for the 2004-05 season), but ER leads among ages 18 to 49 (9.8 million to just under 8 million).

Could anybody please elaborate why ER should be the "longest-running medical drama" "at 15 seasons", when GH started 1963 and is still, after 45 years, in production? Is it an error, or am I missing something?

--91.21.104.223 (talk) 10:02, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes. There's really no comparison between the two. General Hospital is a daytime serial or "soap opera." It runs in the early afternoon, and was a 30 minute program in its early life, before changing to an hour in the late 70's. It is very, very loosely medical: at any given time, a couple characters are doctors ad/or nurses, (as is the case with a couple other of our soaps, notably "Days of our Lives") but the show is about relationships, and these days, about cops and the mafia as much as anything! On the other hand, ER is a prime-time scripted drama set entirely in a hospital. All its main characters but one are doctors (the other being a nurse), its plots center around patient stories and the doctors' lives, and as such, it is very much the longest-running medical drama in American TV history.Drmargi (talk) 12:54, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

In short, there are two reasons why the statement is correct: 1) the use of the word "primetime" (defined as Monday-Friday, 8-11 p.m. Eastern Time): GH is not primetime; ER is; and 2) the fact that GH is not a "medical drama" but a soap opera named after the original setting.

Since GH is not a medical drama, perhaps we might even drop the word "primetime" from the statement. Is ER the longest running medical drama of all time?

Dave Golland (talk) 14:30, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

I would leave it alone. Prime time is accurate and more precise, avoiding potential unanticipated conflicts. General Hospital was medical, in a sense, in its early days. The first soaps (so named because their sponsors were companies such as Proctor and Gamble, that sold soap) were arguably medical because they were set in hospitals and involved the romances among the hospital staff. GH was one of them, as was Days, a soap that is also older than ER. I'd leave well enough alone. It also bears mention that prime time is not defined by any one time zone's span of hours despite the odd belief in some quarters the sun rises and sets on New York; this country has six time zones and prime time varies by time zone: 7-10 pm in some time zones is prime time, for example. Drmargi (talk) 17:31, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Wow. I certainly didn't expect a response touching on time zone elitism. Obviously I'm aware that there are more times zones than Eastern, and that primetime begins at 7 for Central and Mountain time. Like most of us, I remember teasers that said things like "Watch ER next Thursday, 10:00 (9 central)." I used M-F 8-10 ET as a shorthand. The other details (time zones that include Alaska and Hawaii; obscure areas where the lineup starts ten minutes late; the origin of the term "soap opera") are not relevant. Most important is the point that soap operas are "dramas" (in fact I believe the network-preferred term is "daytime drama"--which redirects to "soap opera" in Wikipedia) and some that have been on-air longer than ER can be construed as "medical." Dave Golland (talk) 14:56, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

The industry term remains soap opera, and daytime drama is rarely used. The details were for the benefit of the original poster, who appears to be German, and may not have been familiar with how a soap and a prime-time drama differ, much less what prime-time is. Time zone elitism? Hardly. Just accuracy. Drmargi (talk) 17:12, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, you were correct. Quite frankly, I have never seen GH except as footage in "House, M.D."; E.R. surely is one of the "hardest" series on TV now, also IMO thanks to Michael Crichton, probably the king of verisimilitude. ("Soap opera" has BTW also entered German language as a loanword, as well as its translation "Seifenoper". Commercials were not at that time in Germany's TV, but the stories of the shows tended to clear up "smooth as soap" in the end, giving the translation its legitimation.) I see a certain danger of ER "watering down" as interesting medical cases not already processed begin to get rare and character developement and interactions getting more and more in the middle of every show. Perhaps in season 25, it will be about the same as GH? -91.21.120.240 (talk) 11:57, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry about season 25, because ER is retiring this year. They hung on to Goran Visnjic as long as they could, but it went a bit adrift and centerless when he left, despite trying to replace him with a couple major stars. It's always had a "soap" element to it, as do most scripted dramas, and has drifted increasingly into the soap opera territory in the last year or two. It's sad to see it as lifeless as it is now, but at least the producers had the sense to refuse further renewals and retire with some remaining dignity.

Funnily enough, that's not even the real GH you see in House. It's a mock version, but had the flavor of what GH was like in the 1960's, when the hospital really was the center of the show and the vast majority of the characters were doctors and nurses. Hospital dramas where the hospital is the principle setting (versus medical dramas such as ER where the medicine is central) have a long history in American television that goes back to its origins, and even to radio before it, and GH is probably the last tie to that tradition. But they wandered a long way from its roots in the early 80's when they started into super-hero/spy type stories and now this mafia figure who's dominated the show for some years now. Drmargi (talk) 13:15, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

As strange as that sounds, I think it's good they retire ER. I have seen Carter as a kind of alter ego of Crichton, who wrote the concept in his student years; and even with Ross as an overly domineering character I think Carter can be some kind of identification figure for regular viewers whose developement from beginner to seasoned medical veteran can be followed. (Feeling passive today. Sorry for the language.) I have trouble imagining ER in season 12 without him, or in season 14 when even his four-episodes-deal went out. I agree, it's better to retire it than to keep it alive beyond its time. For the statistics, I think ER has run its course and is due for retirement (interesting - will they make it realistic and let County General close down for economic reasons?); I would have wished for four other seasons of Third Watch and about five other seasons of Medical Investigation. It really seems hard to find a series that does not stop too early or too late. Wasn't in the 1st season of House real GH footage used? I remember reading for the first time about GH as trivia about House in imdb.com. --91.21.120.240 (talk) 17:25, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

I've amended this claim, since the British primetime series Casualty (set in the equivalent of a ER in an English hospital) has run continuously since 1986, clocking up almost twice as many episodes at ER, and is still in production. Nick Cooper (talk) 14:18, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Which I've reverted. We're talking about the longest running American medical drama in the paragraph, which is sufficiently clear - Casualty is British, and the change is unsourced (i.e. source that Casualty has run longer, etc.) not provided. Drmargi (talk) 14:39, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

How predicatable. I have amended again, since it was by no means as clear as you suggest. I also find your questioning of the veracity of my addition rather amusing. Did you actually bother to read the Casualty (TV series) page? The series started in 1986 - fact. It has run continuously since then - fact. It has clocked up more than 669 episodes - fact. It is broadcast in UK peak hours ("primetime") - fact. It's also notable that that page doesn't have a "problem" with acknowledging that General Hospital is the longer-running series, wheras here the omission is rather glaring. In fact, it looks like the current claim was specifically engineered to avoid mentioning General Hospital. Nick Cooper (talk) 15:08, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

What's amusing is the pique that follows getting your little change edited, which is what this is about. I'm not questioning the veracity of your claim, just requesting a source you didn't provide. I'm very familiar with Casualty and know it's a medical soap opera that's been on for donkey's years. My problem is you've established that except for Casualty, etc... can you source that ONE exception? In other words, is that THE ONLY medical drama, world-wide, that's run longer than ER, or is it just a bit of British pride showing? Unless you can source it, the exception specifically mentioning Casualty is inappropriate. On the other hand, you clearly know nothing about General Hospital, which is a soap opera, not a medical drama in any form. Calling GH a medical drama is like calling any show that has a character who's a cop a police procedural. No engineering, just accuracy. Drmargi (talk) 16:49, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually, surely it's up to you to suggest a suitable programme that has run longer than Casualty? But then again, you think Casualty is a "soap opera," so perhaps you're not the best judge, eh? Nick Cooper (talk) 17:41, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

No. You make the edit, you provide the source, which you didn't do. Edit reverted. End of story. Drmargi (talk) 18:27, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Take your pick. But then, it's not really about that. The broadcast dates of all three series are well known, so it's a bit like asking for a citation to prove that 1 + 1 + 1 = 3. Nick Cooper (talk) 12:31, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

List of ER crew

A page for List of ER crew b/c the series is one of tv's most notable ones. highest rated ep-more than 40 million viewers.

Directors: Christopher Chulack (43 episodes, 1995-2008) Jonathan Kaplan (39 episodes, 1997-2005) Richard Thorpe (30 episodes, 1996-2007) Lesli Linka Glatter (13 episodes, 1995-2008) Stephen Cragg (13 episodes, 2005-2008) Félix Enríquez Alcalá (12 episodes, 1994-2007) Laura Innes (12 episodes, 1999-2007) Chris Misiano (11 episodes, 1998-2008) Mimi Leder (10 episodes, 1994-1996) Paul McCrane (9 episodes, 2002-2008) John Wells (8 episodes, 1998-2007) Charles Haid (7 episodes, 1994-2008) Nelson McCormick (6 episodes, 2002-2006) Rod Holcomb (5 episodes, 1994-1998) David Nutter (5 episodes, 1996-2002) Andrew Bernstein (5 episodes, 2006-2008) Anthony Edwards (4 episodes, 1996-2001) Julie Hébert (4 episodes, 2003-2004) Tawnia McKiernan (4 episodes, 2004-2008) James Hayman (3 episodes, 1994-1995) Thomas Schlamme (3 episodes, 1995-1997) Paris Barclay (3 episodes, 1996-2000) Babu Subramaniam (3 episodes, 1998-2003) Jack Orman (3 episodes, 2002-2003) Ernest Dickerson (3 episodes, 2005-2006) Elodie Keene (2 episodes, 1994-1995) Donna Deitch (2 episodes, 1995) Fred Gerber (2 episodes, 1995) Lance Gentile (2 episodes, 1996-1998) Tom Moore (2 episodes, 1996) Jacque Elaine Toberen (2 episodes, 1997-1998) Darnell Martin (2 episodes, 1997) Steve De Jarnatt (2 episodes, 1998-1999) Ken Kwapis (2 episodes, 1999-2000) Marita Grabiak (2 episodes, 2000-2001) Vondie Curtis-Hall (2 episodes, 2001-2002) Alan J. Levi (2 episodes, 2002-2003) Peggy Rajski (2 episodes, 2003) Arthur Albert (2 episodes, 2004-2005) Gloria Muzio (2 episodes, 2005) John E. Gallagher (2 episodes, 2006-2008) Steve Shill (2 episodes, 2006-2007) Skipp Sudduth (2 episodes, 2006-2007) Joanna Kerns (2 episodes, 2006) Anthony Hemingway (2 episodes, 2007-2008) Brett Fallis

Writers: Michael Crichton (313 episodes, 1994-2008) David Zabel (40 episodes, 2001-2008) Joe Sachs (33 episodes, 1996-2008) R. Scott Gemmill (32 episodes, 1999-2007) John Wells (28 episodes, 1994-2005) Jack Orman (28 episodes, 1997-2003) Lydia Woodward (27 episodes, 1994-2006) Dee Johnson (19 episodes, 2000-2005) Lisa Zwerling (19 episodes, 2004-2008) Neal Baer (18 episodes, 1994-2000) Paul Manning (15 episodes, 1994-1998) Carol Flint (15 episodes, 1995-1999) Janine Sherman Barrois (13 episodes, 2005-2008) Karen Maser (8 episodes, 2005-2008) Virgil Williams (8 episodes, 2005-2008) Lance Gentile (7 episodes, 1994-1997) Samantha Howard Corbin (7 episodes, 1996-1998) Mark Morocco (7 episodes, 2003-2004) Sonya Steele (7 episodes, 2003-2004) Meredith Stiehm (6 episodes, 2001-2002) Walon Green (5 episodes, 1997-2000) Linda Gase (5 episodes, 1997-1999) Robert Nathan (4 episodes, 1994-1995) David Mills (4 episodes, 1997-1999) Elizabeth Hunter (4 episodes, 2000-2002) Yahlin Chang (4 episodes, 2002-2005) Julie Hébert (4 episodes, 2002-2004) Bruce Miller (4 episodes, 2002-2004) Jason Cahill (3 episodes, 1996-1997) Patrick Harbinson (3 episodes, 1999-2000) Tracey Stern (2 episodes, 1995) Tom Garrigus (2 episodes, 2001) Jacy Young (2 episodes, 2003-2004) Shannon Goss

Producers: Michael Crichton .... executive producer (315 episodes, 1994-2008) John Wells .... executive producer (315 episodes, 1994-2008) Christopher Chulack .... executive producer / consulting producer / ... (90 episodes, 1994-2008) Wendy Spence Rosato.... producer / associate producer (80 episodes, 1994-2008) Jack Orman .... executive producer / co-executive producer (69 episodes, 1999-2003) Joe Sachs .... executive producer / co-executive producer / ... (69 episodes, 2000-2008) Virgil Williams .... supervising producer / co-producer / ... (68 episodes, 2005-2008) Lydia Woodward .... executive producer / supervising producer / ... (53 episodes, 1994-2005) R. Scott Gemmill .... executive producer / co-executive producer / ... (49 episodes, 1999-2007) David Zabel .... executive producer (49 episodes, 2003-2008) Richard Thorpe .... producer (48 episodes, 1999-2007) Tommy Burns .... producer / co-producer (47 episodes, 2002-2008) Janine Sherman Barrois.... executive producer / co-executive producer (46 episodes, 2005-2008) Lisa Zwerling .... producer / supervising producer / ... (46 episodes, 2005-2008) Chris Misiano .... producer / executive producer (34 episodes, 2000-2009) Teresa Salamunovich .... associate producer (31 episodes, 2001-2004) Dieter Ismagil .... associate producer (29 episodes, 2006-2008) David Malloy .... associate producer (28 episodes, 2007-2008) Jonathan Kaplan .... producer / co-executive producer (26 episodes, 1999-2005) Mike Salamunovich .... co-producer (25 episodes, 1999-2002) Robert Nathan .... co-executive producer / supervising producer (24 episodes, 1994-1995) Carol Flint .... executive producer / co-executive producer (23 episodes, 1996-1999) Dee Johnson .... co-executive producer / executive producer (23 episodes, 2000-2005) Walon Green .... co-executive producer (22 episodes, 1997-1998) Patrick Harbinson .... producer (22 episodes, 1999-2000) Meredith Stiehm .... consulting producer (22 episodes, 2001-2002) Neal Baer .... executive producer / co-executive producer / ... (11 episodes, 1996-2000) Paul Manning .... co-producer / supervising producer (8 episodes, 1994-1996) Mimi Leder .... supervising producer (7 episodes, 1994-1995) Karen Maser .... co-producer (7 episodes, 2008) Penny Adams .... producer (3 episodes, 1999-2000) Yahlin Chang .... co-producer (1 episode, 2004-2005) Vicki Voltarel .... associate producer (unknown episodes, 1996-2000) Bruce Miller .... producer (unknown episodes, 2003) Samantha Howard Corbin .... co-producer (unknown episodes) Michael Hissrich .... associate producer (unknown episodes) David Mills .... co-producer (unknown episodes) Tom Park

Plus a page for Wendy Spence Rosato [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.24.80.214 (talk) 00:39, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Tie to original cast

Visnjic and Tierney worked with all of the original cast except Clooney, and Visnjic replaced him. That's what the statement about ties to the original cast reflects. Grimes and Nagra worked with Wyle for 1-1/2 seasons late in his tenure. That's a tie to him, but none of the original cast aside from him. The statement as changed is inaccurate given they only worked with Wyle, and having worked with him is not notable. Drmargi (talk) 02:43, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

If that is the case, it isn't clear as written and needs to be changed. Frankly, a better argument (although I'm not sure this will hold up on inspection) is that Nagra and Grimes weren't main cast at the same time as Wyle. Dave Golland (talk) 13:16, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

The comment shouldn't even be mentioned in the article. It is way too confusing for even the best ER watcher to understand. With the exception of two characters everybody had some kind of connection to the main cast, which makes that comment revalant. But thats not the point, the point is that it doesn't need to be mentioned at all in the article, it should end with mentioning what cast members left this year. --DJS24 20:10, 14 January 2009(UTC)

I guess I didn't read that entire paragraph, now that I have I would need to say it should be removed. How are we determining the "Main Cast"? It includes Visnjic and Tierney, but what about the other cast members that joined that season. I think I understand the point of the paragraph, but it makes no sense and the tone of it is wrong. It should be removed right away.--DJS24 20:17, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Not disputing your position, DJS24, but clarifying: I think Main Cast is defined as actors with their names in the front credits (or, since Season 12, at the start of Act One) rather than at the start of Act II. Dave Golland (talk) 23:41, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Catherine Banfield

I just wanted to know why Catherine Banfield does not have a page for herself, if you take the fact that she is in the regular cast and not as being just a guest star. Takeit10 (talk) 16:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

I believe she does. But it's up to a user to start one and establish her character is notable enough to merit one. I'm not sure she does yet (I'll leave that to devotees of her character) as opposed to a long-running character like her predecessor, Luka Kovac, who is clearly notable, and about whom there is enough to say to construct a page. Drmargi (talk) 17:37, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

But I started an individual page for her character and someone went there and merged it to the supporting characters page. Just thought that some admnistrator have done this. --Takeit10 (talk) 00:59, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I see. Check the edit history and see. She's not a supporting character, but rather the female lead, so that's not appropriate. Drmargi (talk) 04:52, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I've just recreated her individual page. Let's see if anyone deletes or redirirects it again.
Cheers
Takeit10 (talk) 16:14, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

If they do, revert and request discussion to consensus. That will allow you to make your case for inclusion. Good luck! Drmargi (talk) 18:38, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Request for comment on articles for individual television episodes and characters

A request for comments has been started that could affect the inclusion or exclusion of episode and character, as well as other fiction articles. Please visit the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(fiction)#Final_adoption_as_a_guideline. Ikip (talk) 11:04, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

New Information To Be Add

There's became known a date of DVD release of 14th season in UK (region 2) - 18/05/2009 (http://www.play.com/DVD/DVD/4-/8056367/E-R-Season-14/Product.html). Please, make updates someone. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Perverzion (talk • contribs) 03:07, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Stanley Tucci

Stanley Tucci was an Emmy nominee in 2008 (Outstanding Guest Actor in a Drama Series) http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001804/awards - please, add this information —Preceding unsigned comment added by Perverzion (talk • contribs) 00:41, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

As a registered user you are free to add it yourself. Dave Golland (talk) 21:49, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Doctor Hope

I can't believe there's no mention of Doctor Hope (Elizabeth Jean "Busy" Phillips) Nineko (talk) 03:03, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

So put it in! Dave Golland (talk) 19:39, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Main Cast?

Can someone clarify what we mean by main cast on [2]? The direction I'm seeing is that, we're calling the old cast members the "Main Cast" and not the current ones. Any person to have the name on the opening credits is considered either a past or present main cast member. I believe the whole tone or direction of the "Main Cast" section needs to be changed or removed. I've watched ER for all 15 seasons and I'm confused about these final ties to the main cast. There are several present main cast members to have ties with Noah Wyle (Carter), but we're not including them; calling them stragglers. I contribute to several TV articles and I've never seem this stupid direction on ties to the "Main Cast". So in final thought I see two problems here 1- definition of "Main Cast" is wrong and 2- the tone and direction of this main cast section needs to be changed or removed. I thought I would discuss it before I change or removed the section all together. --DJS24 17:17, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Read "Tie to original cast" above and then change the section as you see fit. If anyone disagrees with your changes they can always re-edit. Dave Golland (talk) 02:00, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Image of the main characters

Hello, I'm just announcing here that I am uploading all of the images of the individual pages of the main characters. The characters that doesn't have any image, I'm uploading too. If anyone has any suggestions or critics, just say it.
Cheers.
Takeit10 (talk) 03:02, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Noah Wyle as main cast

Noah Wyle was listed in the opening credits as main cast last night (15:16, "The Beginning of the End.") I'd like to make the case for listing him under current cast in the infobox for the remainder of the season.

We didn't do this for Anthony Edwards when he returned earlier this season and was listed in the opening credits under main cast. But our justification was that his listing was honorary, this was a one-time appearance, and he appeared only in flashback sequences; after all, his character died in Season Eight.

Wyle's character has returned for five episodes, according to NBC's on-air promotion. His appearances are not flashbacks but a resumption of the John Carter storyline, which, based on last night's scenes, appears to involve an amount of per-episode airtime comparable to that devoted to other members of the main cast.

Based on these points, I believe that Noah Wyle has rejoined the current main cast--at least for the next five episodes.

Any thoughts?

Dave Golland (talk) 16:34, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

He hasn't rejoined the main cast or the series for the season; he's simply fulfilling the final terms of a contract he signed to make guest appearances in two seasons that were originally intended for S12 and S13. He's only making five appearances over the life of a 22 episode season, whereas Parminder Nagra has been billed first the majority of the season. We need to be consistent. Visnjic and Tierney had irregular billiing through their final seasons, but maintained continuous status as main cast. As has been very well publicized, Edwards, Wyle, no doubt Clooney, LaSalle and Margulies made/are making special returns to the series to mark its end, and their main cast billing is an honorific rather than indicating an actual return to the main cast. It would be confusing and misleading, just as it was with Edwards, to move Wyle to the main cast. He's not on a full-season contract, and he's not going to be billed when he doesn't appear based on past history. The note added to his current placement explains the billing adequately. Drmargi (talk) 16:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Will Clooney and/or Margulies be returning for more than one episode? So far, in comparison to Edwards, Innes, and McCrane, Wyle seems like a special case. Anyone else? Dave Golland (talk) 17:03, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

What you believe isn't the point. Do you have a reliable source that Wyle has returned to the main cast in the face of all the publicity, dating back to Season 12, that he would be making these special appearances? Even the preview for Ep. 325 describes his appearances as limited. If you can't source his addition to the main cast, he has to stay where he is. Drmargi (talk) 17:08, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

To the contrary, the source is the TV show's opening credits. The case that Edwards' listing was purely honorary has been made; the case for it being the same for Wyle, given my points above, has not.

I's still like to hear opinions from other registered users who edit this entry. If it comes down to a disagreement between two registered editors, neither owns this page, and both are entitled to make edits.

Dave Golland (talk) 17:19, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Drmargi. I think that Noah Wyle is only billed first because he is a very well known character from this series and they did that just to honor him. I think that he should be in his old place. Takeit10 (talk) 17:17, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

By the way, I'm not talking about changing the listings of current and former cast members and episode appearance lists. I'm only talking about adding Wyle to the infobox at the top of the page while he's listed with the main cast on the show's opening credits.

For that matter, the infobox listing should probably be as simple as "whomever was listed as main cast in the most recent episode." It's not as complicated or difficult to change back and forth as the complete former cast and episode lists.

Dave Golland (talk) 17:24, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Wyle is back for 5 episodes and credited first, due to that it is my belief also that he be added to current cast as his apperances are on a contractual basis - unlike Shane West, Laura Innes, Paul McCrane or Alex Kingston who were billed as special guest stars. I would agree that Anthony Edwards was billed first purely in an honourific sense as a one off which is different to the case with Wyle. (Kovac2009 (talk) 18:15, 20 February 2009 (UTC))

But do you have a reliable source to support that belief? And I mean a press release from ER stating Noah Wyle is again a main cast member, something I've never seen, not interpretation of the credits. There's plenty of publicity, dating back to S12, that these are special appearances, originally scheduled for S13 and held for the final season, originally thought to be S14 and ultimately S15. Unless you can supply a reliable source, and the credits alone are not reliable due to the use of the honorific billing of late, your "belief" is not reliable per WP:OR Drmargi (talk) 20:12, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Press releases are not required as sources. The issue boils down to whether or not there is a difference between a dead character returning in flashbacks in one episode and a living character resuming an existing storyline for multiple episodes. For that determination, television credits are as good a source as any.

I don't know what the press releases and publicity say, but I do know that their purpose is to generate publicity so as to sell commercial time--not to provide references for Wikipedia articles. As such, they are not any more or less true than what viewers see with our own eyes on a TV screen.

Dave Golland (talk) 20:26, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

But press releases are reliable information from the production company and/or network. If Noah Wyle had returned to the main cast, versus making the last of his much-publicized guest appearances, surely NBC would have publicized it. As it is, they've been silent: no press release, no PR, no magazine interviews, no talk show appearances, and no previews announcing his return to the cast. He's gotten less PR for this than Edwards did for a single appearance. There's nothing but billing, which we now know has been manipulated to recognize past first season cast members, rendering it unreliable as a means to determine his contract status. And the bottom line is, belief = WP:OR in this instance, and in the face of a body of reliable evidence indicating he's making guest appearances.

Placement of Wyle in the infobox is fine and dandy compromise, as far as I'm concerned. But there's no reliable evidence for any other changes. Drmargi (talk) 00:30, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

In that case Wyle should at least be placed at the top of the "Past" cast list as his appearancess are regular which cannont be argued against and are obviously more recent than Visnjic's. (Kovac2009 (talk) 02:08, 21 February 2009 (UTC))

That table is arranged based on departure from the main cast. Visnjic departed more recently than Wyle. Moving him again suggests he rejoined the main cast at some point, which he has not done. NBC's summaries of the first two episodes in which Wyle appears settle the matter. He is a guest star, and we have that from a reliable source. Drmargi (talk) 05:31, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm not going to go into great detail, but I do believe that Noah Wyle should be mentioned in the infobox. The fact that his name was in the opening credits is all the information we need here. It's that simple. When his name is no longer billed there, we remove his name from the infobox. --DJS24 05:30, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I believe that Wyle should be credited with the main cast. While the appearence is being billed as 'guest cast' in press releases, on screen to the average viewer watching it would appear that Wyle is in the main cast due to his opening credit billing. I do think all the talk about 'contractual obligations' is a bit null and void as if you are going to use that arguement for Wyle then the same could be made for Visnjic who had a 1 episode contractual obligation to appear in Season 15 which was little more than a cameo. Again press releases for that episode didn't give any mention of Visnjic's appearence, either as main cast or guest, only when the episode was aired and he was credited in the main cast did this entry also get updated. (Richardm9 (talk) 08:14, 22 February 2009 (UTC))

Visnjic's is a different story. He completed a continuing main cast role with that small appearance. Wyle left four seasons ago, and has not rejoined the main cast. Moreover, we have a reliable source that he is a guest star. Listing him as main cast is at least WP:POV and definitely inaccurate. You just can't do it. He's not main cast, no matter what viewers might think. It's not the job of the Wikipedia to reflect what others think, but rather what is accurate. That's the whole point of exclusion of both POV and WP:OR entries. No matter how editors might try to spin it, NBC and ER say he's a guest star, and that's as reliable as it gets.Drmargi (talk) 08:22, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

From what I'm reading here so far, it appears that not listing Wyle in the infobox is based on POV, not the other way around. I'm going to give it until the next episode and then, if the current trend of this discussion has continued, I'll make the change. I'd leave it for longer (as I recommended above in "Titles") but in a few weeks this whole question will be moot. Dave Golland (talk) 18:06, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

I believe the change should be made now, however I will wait as well. Drmargi, I understand your argument, but now I believe your stretching it way beyond whats required for this discussion. Millions of viewers go based on what they see on the TV show's credits, for which I believe is 100% accurate. Drmargi, your going based on press releases; which I'm not saying isn't reliable; but the credits on the show is more reliable. Yes Noah Wyle is a guest star, but they're billing him as a main cast star, so we need to bill his as a main cast member as well. At least until he leaves. --DJS24 18:32, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

I've said before, I don't give two hoots what you do with the infobox. List Wyle, whatever. But he is not main cast, as NBC and ER have made clear. Any other changes are WP:POV and WP:OR as you've made clear by your preference for what you assert viewers will think (and mind you, you've yet to present a shred of evidence they are thinking what you content, just making an assumption), rather than what can be reliably sourced. As for the credits as reliable, again, that's WP:POV and WP:OR given the honorary biling of some returning cast. As it is, a good bit of this is driven by agendas other than accuracy, which is all I've ever contented is what's needed here. Drmargi (talk) 19:47, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Based on that, I have added Noah Wyle to the infobox; there's no point to continue this long drag of a discussion. If your some strange reason the concenus is over turned, then I have no problem removing Wyle from the infobox. I only added his name to the infobox, nothing else. I believe its worth mentioning him in at least that. --DJS24 21:25, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

If you remember in Season 12 he was billed as a special guest star. now he is billed on the starring part...that should be evidence enough —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.87.73.114 (talk) 07:17, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

It's not. We have a reliable source, ER itself, that he's a guest star. You cannot ignore a reliable source, no matter how you care to interpret billing. And remember, we know they've done honorific billing once already with Anthony Edwards. Unless someone can produce reliable evidence in writing that Wyle has rejoined the main cast, we have to go by what ER and NBC tell us: he's a guest star. Drmargi (talk) 05:47, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

The fact is other past cast have appeared this season and billed normally, Noah Wyle is billed first with current cast and also did the voice over on last night's recap which is also reserved for a regular cast member. NBC press releases likely bill him as guest cast because in essence he is a guest and they want to hype it up as much as possible, I and others here seem to take the actual show credits as authority. Further more repeatedly placing him in a box entitled 'Past Cast' is more misleading than him being in 'Current Cast' as he is obviously current - he is appearing right now, billed first and in the majority of people's view here belongs in current. (Kovac2009 (talk) 12:42, 27 February 2009 (UTC))

You guys miss the point. You're interpreting Wyle's status in the cast. Edwards did the "previously on" in his episode, too. You might also note it's only being done for the two original cast actors (so far) who are reprising their roles working in the ER itself, as we saw them for years. None of it adds up to ER putting Wyle back on a main cast contract and his rejoining the main cast - you have to interpret all these bits of evidence in order to come to that conclusion, and no matter how persuasive your arguments might be, that's WP:OR, particularly in the face of the celebratory and summative nature of the current season's casting and the absence of any reliable evidence such a casting move has been made. On the other hand. there are a collection of press releases from NBC and ER announcing both Wyle's and Edwards' appearances as guest stars, including current material on NBC's ER website and NBC/Universal Media's site for the show. And that's as reliable source as it gets that they're guest cast. I'm uncomfortable with him being in the infobox, too, but at least it can be argued that it reflects each week's billing, and can be easily changed in the weeks Wyle doesn't appear and won't be billed. The notes are designed to overcome any confusion, but even the addition of Wyle's episode numbers in the main rather than guest cast boxes is erroneous.

There's a limit to consensus. It's designed to solve problems when there is conflicting or absent evidence. There's no such problem here. This is an attempt to use consensus to ignore two reliable sources in favor of WP:OR. Drmargi (talk) 15:23, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Infobox vs. Cast list: Although the trend of discussion favors changing the list as well, and I personally think it should be changed, I am not pushing to change the list order. The infobox, in my opinion, is of more immediate importance because of its enhanced visibility at the top of the page. In a few weeks this question about the list will be moot. For the sake of comity, I suggest that we leave the list order as is and maintain the infobox to reflect the most recent first-billed cast list. Dave Golland (talk) 23:37, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Infobox

After the series ends next month, will we remove "current cast" from the infobox and replace it with "original cast?" Dave Golland (talk) 16:34, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I would say, we need to add all former stars from past seasons (might be too much for the infobox) or put "see below" with all the cast members mentioned in the article. --DJS24 17:01, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I think that adding all regular cast members would be too much. I agree with the replacement from the current cast to the original cast. Takeit10 (talk) 17:21, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

There may be a standard. Someone should check Wikipedia entries for defunct TV shows. Maybe I'll do that. Dave Golland (talk) 17:27, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

The Cheers infobox lists, under "starring," Shelley Long and her replacement Kirstie Alley, and the late Nicholas Colasanto and his replacement Woody Harrelson, among a total of ten names. Following the same format, ER would list 26 names. Dave Golland (talk) 17:40, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

The Hill Street Blues infobox, on the other hand, gives a mixed message. It seems to list the entire original cast plus Dennis Franz. Among the replacements it doesn't list is Robert Prosky (who replaced the late Michael Conrad). It has a total of 13 names. Dave Golland (talk) 18:02, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I've been looking at some other cancelled shows pages as well and I realized that there is no standard. Some pages lists the original cast, others lists the most known characters and actors. But I think that for the ER page, the original cast would be the most appropriate listing. Takeit10 (talk) 18:11, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I would say, our best method to use here is a "See Below" where we can have all the cast members listed, that way we don't leave any members out. I don't disagree w/ the "Orginal Cast", I just think "See Below" is better. How would we determine the "orginal cast"? Season One? We need to decide as a group for this format because there is no guildline or standard in order. For the most part, shows that are no longer active normally list all the main cast stars, however we have over twenty. --DJS24 19:41, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

The trouble is, fondness for old cast members, particulary Wyle, seems to be coloring judgments about who is/isn't main cast. Wyle is guest cast, as has been well publicized, given an honorary billing being accorded all returning cast this final season. The guidelines are that we either list the current main cast (Nagra - Bassett), the entire S15 cast (which would rather confusingly require the addition of Visnjic, Tierney and Phifer in that order before Nagra) or the WHOLE cast. There's no provision for listing just the original cast, many of whom are not the longest running cast members (1-5 being Wyle, Innes, Visnjic, Tierney and Marguilies), and as sentimental as attachments to that group might be, there's no good reason for limiting the Infobox entry to them alone. Drmargi (talk) 20:17, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Actually, what we seem to have discovered are that there are no guidelines, except that the infobox list of actors will be converted to "starring." And the discussion of Wyle's current status has no bearing here, as this is not a discussion of the current cast but of what we will do after the series ends, when there is no current cast.

Listing only the Season Fifteen Cast under "starring"--under any definition of the Season Fifteen cast--seems ridiculous on its face. So far we haven't found any defunct TV shows that do that. If we follow the Cheers model and list all actors who were ever in the main cast, that would be a 26-person-long list. But if we follow the Hill Street Blues model and list only the original cast plus one or two long-running actors who came on later, we'd have to decide who makes the cut. And there we'd run into far too much subjectivity. Someone would want to put Stamos in because he's "soooo hot," or cut Innes because she at various times was a "bad" character. DJS24 recommends listing none, with a "see below."

I'm inclined to list all or none. Dave Golland (talk) 20:39, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I think that if we decided to put the original cast plus one or two, it would only generate an unnecessary discussion. People will be arguing and in the end, no one would be satisfied with the "final list". And about what Drmargi was saying, is not because of the "fondness" for the old characters. It is because some may have a lot more meaning to the show than others. I can assure you that when someone reads "Noah Wyle" or "George Clooney" they will associate to ER a lot faster than if they read "David Lyons" or "Angela Bassett". But leaving only the original cast would not be very fair to the others. So I agree with the see below list. Takeit10 (talk) 21:59, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Cast photo update

I'm updating the photo of the main cast of the show. I'll replace it for the 15th season cast.
Any critics?. Takeit10 (talk) 17:54, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I recommend putting the Season Eight photo near the "continuity" section. Dave Golland (talk) 18:10, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

But the season 8 photo is already near the continuity section. Where can i put the season 15 cast photo? Takeit10 (talk) 18:13, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Main cast. Dave Golland (talk) 18:22, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

A photo in the main cast section would break the layout of the table of the cast names. I put the original cast photo in the continuity section and the 15th season cast on the main departures section. Takeit10 (talk) 18:26, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good. Dave Golland (talk) 18:28, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps the current cast photo should replace the title card at the top. That way the original cast photo could be with "main cast" and the Season Eight photo could be with "continuity." At least until the end of the series, when we'll need to re-examine the entry as one for a defunct rather than current series. Dave Golland (talk) 19:24, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I would need to disagree w/ replacing the title card w/ the season 15 cast photo. The title picture sets up the page. Is there a reason why we're keeping the season 8 picture. Can't we replace that photo with the season 15 photo for now? --DJS24 19:45, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I also believe that replacing the title card is not a good idea. Plus, every other TV series page has a title card at the top. It is a standard picture, I suppose. And I've already replaced the season 8 picture for a season 15 cast picture. I also uploaded a picture from the orginal cast.
And one more other thing: I am really really sorry about my poor English. I'm not american and I've been reading this discussion page and I've discovered that we have a lot of Ph.d's editing this page. So, if I say or write an unknown word, please feel free to correct me.
Cheers. Takeit10 (talk) 22:05, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

We PhDs should perhaps be embarrassed that we're taking this so seriously. Dave Golland (talk) 22:35, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion

This is just an suggestion, but I'm believe we should remove the sections between Cast Continuity and Notable Guest Stars. I don't believe the information about the main cast needs to be mentioned again. We already have the main cast ties and the entire chart talking about the main cast. We already have a page on all the supporting stars, where all of them are listed. As for the director section, its not that important to mention in the article. The directors are listed on the episode page and on each star article on wikipedia. I know I thought before that the "Setting the Tone" was needed, but it can be removed too. This is just a suggestion. Feedback please. --DJS24 22:50, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

You mean remove the "Cast Continuity" section altogether. OK. No objection here. Dave Golland (talk) 02:52, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, all that information is already mentioned in it's own way. That information just keeps getting repeated and repeated. --DJS24 03:22, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I noticed that the cast photo of the last season was removed too with the whole section. I was thinking in putting this photo in the Departures section. Objections? Takeit10 (talk) 23:51, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

None here. Dave Golland (talk) 22:03, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

NO problem here either. I'm sorry I think I removed it without even seeing it. --DJS24 22:21, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi - just a suggestion that it might be nice to mention that ER fittingly will end in the UK on Noah Wyle's 38th birthday.

That's what you call fancruft - it's fun for the Wyle fans, but not particularly important or noteworthy, especially when you consider this is an American show. Drmargi (talk) 00:11, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Times Article

At the risk of deviating from the stated purpose of this page, I'm posting a link to today's NYTimes article on ER. Since it might be used as a source for the page, I guess it's not too much of a stress to post it here. Link: [3] Dave Golland (talk) 14:53, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Misinterpretation of Wyle discussion in edit summaries

The discussion of Noah Wyle's status above has not resulted in a consensus that Wyle is not main cast. Actually, the overwhelming opinion in that thread is that he is currently main cast. (All participants did agree that Wyle's name should go in the infobox, and one participant--myself--suggested that as a compromise over the larger question, but that certainly doesn't mean that the consensus was against Wyle being main cast.) Nevertheless, I have read several edit summaries these past two weeks wherein that discussion is used as a reason to revert edits moving Wyle's information in the chart from "former main cast" to "current main cast."

If editors would like to make such reverts, they obviously can do so. But they should not be disingenuous in their edit summaries by implying that the discussion supports their position. They should use another reason in the edit summary, and if they leave the summary blank, it is subject to reversion for lack of explanation.

Dave Golland (talk) 17:41, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

You can't resist a dig, can you? I've ignored you as long as I can, which is what you do with a bully, but now you've crossed the line. In so doing, you have now assumed the role of owner and chief enforcement officer for this article, no matter how you try to couch your actions. Obviously, they will need both closer scrutiny and closer monitoring.

Let's be clear: there is nothing in my edit comments that suggest, directly or indirectly, that there is consensus regarding Wyle. But the discussion does include substantive evidence that Wyle is NOT main cast, including reliable sourcing. Under these conditions, consensus is moot, as it is not designed to create conditions under which reliably source edits can be ignored, particularly in favor of what can only be viewed as both WP:OR and WP:POV interpretation of the unreliable credits. They also make my edit summaries perfectly valid. Drmargi (talk) 17:53, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

WP:OR refers to opinion within articles. What we are talking about is opinion within discussion, which is valid and necessary. But you raise an interesting point about ownership. I am willing to entertain the possibility that you are right (which is why I proposed a "cool-down" on your talk page last weekend). I'll continue this thought in another topic. Dave Golland (talk) 19:07, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Exactly. The attempt to gain consensus in order to add opinion to the article over a reliable source (ER's own producer and network) sets up an edit that will violate WP:OR and WP:POV.

You might also consider stepping back and gaining perspective before engaging in a potentially divisive discussion, particularly given your enforcement efforts have been focused on my edits, for reasons known only to you. I ignored your "cool down" suggestion because I had no need to cool down. You, on the other hand, apparently do. This is a one-sided war you're waging, one in which I decline to engage. Drmargi (talk) 20:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Amazing.

Anyway, statements by ER's producer and network are no more or less valid sources than the credits of the actual show. All sources can and should be interrogated when possible for POV, and used by Wikipedia editors accordingly. The producers and network are engaged in a profit-generating exercise, which is POV by default. And that's OK, as long as we don't claim that what the producers and network say is the "God's truth." By the same token, the appearance of names in credits has to do with negotiations between the producers, network, and actors, SAG rules, and possibly other factors of which I am not aware. If Wikipedia has rules stating that the word of producers or other publicity materials are to be considered superior to other sources for entries pertaining to television shows, please provide that link. Otherwise, your statements on this issue are your opinion, just as my statements are my opinion. And when most of the regular editors on the page have expressed an opinion or had time to decide not to do so, and a majority of the opinions expressed favor a particular argument, then I call that consensus. The consensus in this case, for the reasons noted in the discussion above (and yes, Drmargi, I read your posts--I just wasn't swayed by them), is that Noah Wyle's appearance for the current five episodes constitutes a temporary return to the main cast.

I still hope we can avoid the personal and just talk about the issues.

Dave Golland (talk) 21:40, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Amazing is right. Are you seriously suggesting that your interpretation of the credits has more veracity than a statement by the producers of the show, the same people who employ, and thereby negotiate the contract of Noah Wyle? Incredible. What you fail to accept is that the producers and network have said, in words of one syllable, that Noah Wyle is a guest star. Until and unless you have reliable evidence he is a member of the main cast, that's the only source we have, and we must go by what it says. All the twisting and turning and attempting to reshape that simple fact doesn't alter that one simple fact. You have nothing that meets any minimum standard of reliability to go by, just what you think the credits might possibly mean.

And just a reminder: YOU made it personal. You have no one to blame but yourself if it remains so, and the power to see that it doesn't. It's up to you. Leave me in peace and stop the coy manipulations, and we're fine. Drmargi (talk) 23:40, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, I get it. I understand now. Everyone else is wrong and you are right. Dave Golland (talk) 01:13, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Feedback sought: ownership of the ER page

Drmargi has accused me of being the "owner and chief enforcement officer for this article" (see "Misinterpretation of Wyle discussion in edit summaries" above"). If others agree, I'd like to hear about it here (not on my talk page or hers, which most ER editors probably don't read), so that I can decide whether or not I need to step back and get some perspective. Dave Golland (talk) 19:07, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

No I don't see any ownership here. I just think this is a senseless situation about to get out of hand. As much as I like to see a good rivalry, I think we all, including myself need to step back and remember that this is an article to which we as editors can all contribute. As we all contribute, I think it’s for the greater good of the article. Wow, I've never written a paragraph like this before. --DJS24 23:07, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I'd happily step back and leave it alone. It's all I've ever attempted to do, but it's not me who is the aggressor, nor me who made it personal. I've ignored it as long as I can, but I've reached my limit. My right to edit according to my judgment has not been respected by another editor, leading to a series of sometimes oblique, sometimes direct and often obstructive posts reflecting whatever issue he has with me, including a recent attempt to seek consensus that included disregarding my comments. As soon as he backs off, we're good. This was not an issue of my making, and it's not a rivalry. It's simply my attempt to be left in peace and to have my right to edit as I judge appropriate resepcted without having accusations of bad faith, twisting of what I've said and other such efforts used against me. Drmargi (talk) 23:30, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

After removing a prior discussion about ownership from this page to her own talk page in January, today she deleted it altogether. So I looked it up in her archive and moved it to my own talk page. Dave Golland (talk) 14:05, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

They forgot to add William H Macy!!!

From IMBD: William H Macy:

    Dr. David Morgenstern (31 episodes, 1994-2009)
   - A Long, Strange Trip (2009) TV episode .... Dr. David Morgenstern
   - Shades of Gray (1998) TV episode .... Dr. David Morgenstern
   - Gut Reaction (1998) TV episode .... Dr. David Morgenstern
   - A Bloody Mess (1998) TV episode .... Dr. David Morgenstern
   - Something New (1997) TV episode .... Dr. David Morgenstern
     (26 more)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pjkatz (talk • contribs) 21:59, 11 March 2009 (UTC) 

Forgot to add him where?Takeit10 (talk) 03:27, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure what this whole thing means either. Anyone know? --DJS24 18:48, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

notable guest star....

What about listing Danny Glover as Pratt's father? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.171.0.146 (talk) 03:12, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Clooney, Margulies, and LaSalle

I think that despite the consensus that the current infobox reflect the most recently-billed main cast, as of now the single-episode reprise of the Clooney, Margulies, and LaSalle characters are closer in nature to that of Edwards than to that of Wyle, and so their names should be left out of the infobox. Agreed? Dave Golland (talk) 13:40, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, their situation is much different than Wyle. They fall under the same situation as Edwards. --DJS24 15:38, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Same here. Takeit10 (talk) 03:52, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Reference for Nielsen ratings of the early season

Could somebody please add the following reference to the nielsen ratings table at the end of the article: http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117977124.html?categoryid=2874&cs=1 - Thank you. I'm not allowed to make an update to the site.--Stegosaurus Rex (talk) 20:02, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Wyle as Main Cast

Dave Golland persists in reverting an edit backed up by reliable sources (NBC, ER's production company) that Noah Wyle is a guest star for his five-episode appearance on the show, instead offering only WP:POV and WP:OR arguments he is main cast by interpreting his placement in the credits, despite knowing other original-cast members are being accorded special honorific placement in the credits. Despite having multiple opportunities to do so, he has failed to provide even one reliable source for his edits, nor has he attempted to meet the burden of verifiability that is on him, given he is attempting to ignore reliable sources Wyle is a guest star. This has drug on for five weeks now, and continued edits prosecuting this unsourced agenda can only be viewed as vandalism.

I again offer any editor the opportunity to provide even one reliable source Wyle is main cast, not the five-episode guest star NBC has announced he is. Until then, I will continue to revert any edits placing him with the main cast. Drmargi (talk) 14:46, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Drmargi is engaging in ownership of this page and repeatedly using a disingenuous edit summary to revert one particular change. The consensus is that Noah Wyle is main cast for these five episodes based on his repeated appearance on the main cast titles (see "Noah Wyle as main cast," above), despite her opinion that the NBC production release is a more valid source than the television show's actual titles. This consensus has resulted in an agreement that the infobox should reflect Wyle as main cast. No agreement has been reached on the cast members table further down the page. As such, Drmargi is incorrect to revert the edits--by multiple editors--moving Wyle's entry in the table from "former main cast" to "current main cast" using the talk page discussion as a justification. If she were to state that there is no consensus to upgrade Wyle, that too would be incorrect. The only correct edit summary for such a revert--albeit temporary, because consensus has been reached--is that the consensus has not resulted in a specific agreement. Drmargi has now violated the three-revert rule on this matter, but rather than go directly to a request for penalty, I am first taking the softer step of requesting unofficial mediation. (Note: tonight is Wyle's final scheduled appearace with the main cast of ER, but the series run is ending shortly, and this debate will continue on the (somewhat less visible) issue of crediting cast members with specific main cast appearances.) Dave Golland (talk) 17:46, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Drmargi is supposedly campaigning for this page to make as much sense as possible by placing Carter in the past characters list, I however see absolutely no sense at all in having someone placed in the infobox, and also in the box at the bottom of the page listed as being current, and then listing them as past in the 'cast' section. The page shows absolutely no continuity between sections. The consensus is that Wyle should be placed as current in all sections as he is a current cast member, NBC press releases are not the authority on this, NBC press releases are what is used to advertise a specific episode, the authority would be information from the production team itself which no one has had access to - apart from the shows credits which clearly state Wyle is appearing in a starring role, this coupled with the fact he has himself admitted he is back under a full contract and also (possibly trivially) does the voiceover on the show's recap section (Drmargi stated that Anthony Edwards also did this on the episode in which he appeared, however he did not) signals to me and apparently the majority of people that contribute or at least attempt to contribute to this page that Carter IS current cast on a contractual basis and NOT simply an honourific guest. (Kovac2009 (talk) 00:04, 21 March 2009 (UTC))

I encourage Kovac2009 and any other regular editor to visit the mediation page linked below and participate in the mediation there, or at least remain fully informed as to how the mediation is proceeding.

A user has requested mediation on this issue. A mediator is here to help resolve your dispute. The case page for this mediation is located here.

Original Research and POV in Main Cast section

After some considerable thought, I have done a major edit to the main cast section of the article, removing a body of original research and some POV descriptions of character roles. I did not enter into this edit lightly, and have several specific issues with the content I removed:

a) The description of "role types" beginning with as Kerry as the "tough administrator role" are entirely POV. Although the description arguably fits, there is no sourcing to support the implicit contention that this is the way Kerry was meant to be characterized by the writers. Certainly, she was a tough administrator, but it's only one aspect of her character. Absent a reliable source that this was a character type the show meant to have, that Kerry originated it and that it then was passed to Banfield (what about Moretti?) this is a POV character description, and original research regarding its transfer from Weaver to Banfield.

b) The assumption made in these edits that actor B replaced actor A without any sourcing. Again, this is a mix of POV and OR. A number of show producers dating back to Jack Orman (who wrote Clooney out and Visnjic in, the first major change in cast), and continuing to David Zabel, have said the show never replaces one character or character type with another, and the editor offers no sources to support his one-to-one replacements noted in the article. Instead John Wells and a number of executive producers have insisted repeatedly that each character is individual and not meant to replace another.

c) The entire "generational shift" discussion, while an interesting observation that makes a certain amount of sense, is entirely WP:OR and completely unsourced. The generational line is an arbitrary one and plenty of cast are post-Gen X, so why that line in particular? It's also flawed - the first Gen X additions to the cast were Maria Bello and Goran Visnjic, both of whom are younger than Maura Tierney, to name one example. But more importantly, this is just the natural change in the cast that can be expected to take place when a show is on for 15 years. You can make the same argument about Law and Order, but is it relevant, intended by the producers, or even notable? I would argue not absent any supporting sources. At the very least, it entirely misses (and consequently minimizes) the important generational shift that is deliberate: the generations of doctors and medical students that come through the show over its 15 years.

Drmargi (talk) 22:31, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Save ER petition

Hi,

I think whomever updates this page should include that there is a current petition to extend ER's television run. This is part of its history now and shows its fanbase. Of course, don't list the link--but just mention its on petition online.Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Weneedtosaveer (talk • contribs) 18:06, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Literary present tense

With the series finale airing tonight, I imagine there will then be a mad rush to change the entire article to past tense (i.e., "ER was a series that aired on NBC...blah blah blah). What we need to be aware of, however, is that not everything should be changed to past tense. For instance, in the above statement, the correct way to say it after tonight would be, "ER is a TV series that aired on NBC..." The reason for this is literary present tense, which dictates that all literary works (including TV shows and movies) are always viewable "in the present" and therefore the entire series is described in the present tense. For an outstanding discussion of this, see Talk:The West Wing/Archive 2#Regarding literary present tense (was and is). Please be on the lookout for this. --Hnsampat (talk) 12:53, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Ratings Box

Why would you not include the series finale with the overall ratings for the season? Every other show I've seen on wikipedia has, and Zap2it, Variety and others include it in the overall season ratings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.87.73.114 (talk) 19:59, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Episode Count

I made a list of the amount of episode each character was billed in according to the list in the graph previously, but I was wondering if someone would double check my count? Also, does anybody think we should modify the count to subtract the episodes that a character was billed in but did not appear? J52y (talk) 05:03, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I think the first issue at hand is to determine how to make the episode count - by episodes in the cast, appearances or episodes credited. With some cast members, which way we count can make a fair-sized difference. I'd go with episodes credited and KISS, but that's me. Drmargi (talk) 05:16, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

What does "KISS" stand for? J52y (talk) 23:58, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Keep It Simple Stupid. In other way, do it the easiest way. That's why episodes credited works best to my mind. How many times we actually saw an actor's face isn't as relevant as their longevity in the cast. Drmargi (talk) 00:04, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good. Besides, I wasn't ready to go double check every episode for each character. Can you then double check my math? Thank you. J52y (talk) 03:18, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I'll check them over the next couple days. We need to add a note to explain how the total is calculated. Drmargi (talk) 03:20, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I added a note. J52y (talk) 06:17, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Looks good to me, and this way the episode count is consistent with the information in the table. I've started checking counts, and will leave a message here once I finish. Drmargi (talk) 06:22, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

How do we make it so that you can rearrange the list by episode count, if you wanted to? I've tried and failed, so I was wondering if you knew how. J52y (talk) 07:27, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Images

Would it fit to put the final screenshot of County General Hospital on the article, or even on a new article for County General Hospital? --Kitch ^{(Talk : Contrib)} 02:51, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

I think it would be great if we had a screenshot of that final scene. I could upload that shot. We need to see if everyone agrees with that and where to put this photo. Takeit10 (talk) 05:30, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

As nice an idea as it is, a screenshot will be taken from copyrighted material, and that's a Wikipedia no-no. It's very likely to be challenged and deleted pretty quickly. Drmargi (talk) 06:27, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

I do think that making a County General Article is a good idea, though. J52y (talk) 02:43, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Copying a screen shot would definitely violate copyright regs, however, a section on County General should probably be included. I'm entirely unitiated on the ways of Wiki, but it is well established that the fictitious hospital was based upon the old Cook County Hospital in Chicago. One example off the top of my head that is easily verifiable: The mailing address a CD sent to Rasgotra from Barnett in s15e16 is 1835 W Harrison. The patient records and public address of the historic Cook County Hospital building was 1901, however, the medical department and correspondence to doctors used the 1835 address (Source: google 1835 Harison Chicago for a plethora of medical journals and historic documents using the address). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.167.6.229 (talk) 03:49, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Semi-Protection

Why do you always semi-protect this article? I can't edit anything because of this. Please disable the semi-protection!!--Stegosaurus Rex (talk) 10:45, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Secondary characters

I have recently helped reorganized the secondary character pages into different pages, but I need help making them more complete.

Firstly, I want to put a paragraph or so describing the different type of character's role on the show (ie, like explaining what nurses do in the show and how they interact with the main cast and how they don't typically get written off (with exception), but I find that I don't really know what to say or how to say it, so I was hoping you all would help me out there.

Secondly, the pages themselves need a lot of work. We don't have any EMTs listed, and I made a subsection for them, but I don't know any details about the EMTs off hand, but they are a part of the show and should be considered, imo. But I do think we need to get more detailed about the recurring characterson the show. After 15 seasons, there are a lot of details for these recurring characters, and most of them are missing.

Thirdly, should we make a separate section for secondary med students and interns specifically, or should we just keep them on the secondary doctor's page?J52y (talk) 02:41, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

There seems to be some duplication between the large List of supporting characters in ER and the smaller articles like List of secondary doctors in ER. This is not ideal as it will lead to divergent entries on the same supporting characters. I think the List of supporting characters would be better suited to acting as a clearing house for the other lists but each smaller list still needs to take care to establish its own notability.

I agree that a paragraph detailing the character archetypes roles on the show would be useful for each subarticle but fear that we would be performing original research unless we are to find some sources for such a section.

I think med students and interns should stay on the doctors page for now and we can reassess when some of the other heavy lifting has been done.

I'm happy to help out with the EMTs.

--Opark 77 (talk) 01:29, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Restructuring

After many months of confining myself to tinkering with the crew, episode list and season subpages I've been quite bold this evening and had a go at restructuring this article.

• I've split the article up into three broad sections - production, episodes, and reception.
• It seemed to be dominated by a cast section which was also a clearing house for various subarticles so I've split this off into a separate article (Cast of ER).
• The article was missing key areas of information like crew and critical response so I've added sections for this which I will work on over the next few days.
• I've rewritten the awards and nominations subarticle to include all 375 award noms and have therefore set up a short summary for the main article as there is now a comprehensive list elsewhere.

I'm not finished working on it by any means and would welcome any criticism at this early stage so I have a chance to take it on board going forward.--Opark 77 (talk) 01:23, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Emmy nominations

123 Emmy nominations is not correct. Currently, ER has got only 122. See here: http://cdn.emmys.tv/awards/2008pte/60thpte_nomsfact.php --Stegosaurus Rex (talk) 20:10, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Season 13 DVD box set

ER Season 13 DVD box set came out on 29th April in Australia (Regeion 4).This should be added to the table. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamsim1989 (talk • contribs) 08:00, 8 May 2009 (UTC)